3:09 a.m.
Comments inline
Matej
----- Original Message -----
From: "Emily Jiang" <EMIJIANG(a)uk.ibm.com>
To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "J J SNYDER" <j.j.snyder(a)oracle.com>, "Weld"
<weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>, weld-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 8:55:34 PM
Subject: Re: [weld-dev] To drop or not to drop JDK 7 support for Weld 2.4?
https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/java-se-8-and-java-ee-7
From a Java EE point of view, the Java EE 7 specification requires at
least Java SE 7.
I wouldn't put much trust into a blogpost.
Anyhow the article basically encourages you to use JDK 8 features with EE7.
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaee/documentation/javaee7sdk-in...
Installing the Software
Requirements
Java EE 7 SDK distributions require JDK 7 Update 65 and above or JDK 8
Update 20 and above.
Java EE 7 SDK != Java EE impl. Besides it says you can use 7 or 8 and recommends latest
JDK release anyway.
I was expecting these limitations to be present in EE umbrella spec or something like that
(imposing minimal version on implementations) but found none so far.
Many thanks,
Emily
===========================
Emily Jiang
WebSphere Application Server, CDI & MicroProfile Development Lead
MP 211, DE3A20, Winchester, Hampshire, England, SO21 2JN
Phone: +44 (0)1962 816278 Internal: 246278
Email: emijiang(a)uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
From: Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
To: Emily Jiang <EMIJIANG(a)uk.ibm.com>
Cc: weld-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org, J J SNYDER
<j.j.snyder(a)oracle.com>, Weld <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Date: 26/02/2018 16:00
Subject: Re: [weld-dev] To drop or not to drop JDK 7 support for
Weld 2.4?
Sent by: weld-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
> as Java EE7 requires the minimum Java version being 7.
I was actually trying to find this somewhere.
Can you point to *exactly* where this is stated?
I was unable to find such statement.
Matej
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Emily Jiang" <EMIJIANG(a)uk.ibm.com>
> To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "John D. Ament" <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com>, "J J
SNYDER"
<j.j.snyder(a)oracle.com>, "Weld"
> <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>, weld-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 4:45:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] To drop or not to drop JDK 7 support for Weld
2.4?
>
> Hi Matej,
>
> My vote is "not to drop JDK 7 support", as Java EE7 requires the minimum
> Java version being 7. If you remove the JDK7 support, this will have big
> impact to the customer who are currently use JDK7.
>
> Weld 3.x requires JDK 8, which is understandable.
>
> Many thanks,
> Emily
> ===========================
> Emily Jiang
> WebSphere Application Server, CDI & MicroProfile Development Lead
>
> MP 211, DE3A20, Winchester, Hampshire, England, SO21 2JN
> Phone: +44 (0)1962 816278 Internal: 246278
>
> Email: emijiang(a)uk.ibm.com
> Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
>
>
>
>
> From: Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> To: "John D. Ament" <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com>
> Cc: J J SNYDER <j.j.snyder(a)oracle.com>, Weld
> <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Date: 26/02/2018 13:05
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] To drop or not to drop JDK 7 support for
> Weld 2.4?
> Sent by: weld-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
>
>
>
> Valid point, it would definitely make sense to raise minor version in
this
> case.
>
> We are unsure if we will actually remove jdk 7 sipport, but at this
point
> any request for backport
> or any attempt at support for newer java versions presents a
considerable
> pain because of JDK 7 support.
> Therefore I concluded I will ask on this mail and see if it would be ok
to
> eventually remove the support.
>
> Matej
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John D. Ament" <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com>
> > To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Weld" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>, "J J SNYDER"
> <j.j.snyder(a)oracle.com>
> > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 1:38:39 PM
> > Subject: Re: [weld-dev] To drop or not to drop JDK 7 support for Weld
> 2.4?
> >
> > Seems weird to me that you would drop JDK support in a patch fix on
> 2.4.x.
> > Seems more appropriate to keep 2.4.x on JDK 7, 2.5.x (if you ever
create
> > it) on JDK 8. 3.0.x already requires JDK 8.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:18 AM Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello everyone,
> > >
> > > as you probably know, Weld 2.4 (CDI 1.2 impl) currently supports
even
> JDK
> > > 7.
> > > We are currently considering dropping this limitation and moving to
> JDK 8
> > > as minimal version.
> > > >From what we know, some servers (such as WildFly) already require
> Java 8
> > > to even boot up so this limitation is pretty much pointless there.
> > >
> > > Therefore, please let us know if dropping JDK 7 support presents a
> problem
> > > for you or if you see any other reason for Weld 2.4 to stay JDK 7
> > > compatible.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Matej
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > weld-dev mailing list
> > > weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > >
>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.jboss.org_mail...
>
> > >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> weld-dev mailing list
> weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.jboss.org_mail...
>
>
>
>
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU
>
_______________________________________________
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.jboss.org_mail...
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU